What has been termed one of the nicest pieces of property in Salmon Arm is the site for a proposed residential development.
At the May 7 meeting of the city’s development and planning services committee, council discussed an application from Gary Arsenault of Green Emerald Investments Inc. for development of properties at 1641 and 1681 28th Ave. NE, owned by R. & A. Holmes and R. & T. Jobe, respectively.
The properties are located between the CP Railway and Lakeshore Road NE, and north of the Appleyard subdivision.
Unusual for a planning meeting, about 30 people were in the gallery, many wearing red or green paper buttons shaped like apples, to symbolize they reside in Appleyard.
The application requires an amendment to the official community plan (OCP) from low density residential to medium density, as well as a rezoning from single family residential (R-1) to medium density (R-4).
Corey Paiement, the city’s director of development services, said a total of 95 units are proposed for the 8.3 hectare site, 55 of which would be bareland strata lots, with an additional 40 townhouse or condo units on the east side of the property.
He said the R-4 zoning would be required because the lot areas would be smaller than permitted in the R-1 zone, plus multi-family dwellings are proposed for the east side.
He noted that under R-1 zoning, there is the theoretical possibility of 182 lots on a site of this size. Under the medium density zone, up to 332 lots could be allowed. Paiement said the applicant believes 95 units are feasible and is agreeable to signing a covenant limiting the development to 95.
The terrain is steep, with slopes exceeding 40 per cent along the eastern and western sides of the biggest parcel.
Paiement noted that if Arsenault decided to proceed under the R1 zoning, with the theoretical potential for 182 lots, there would be no rezoning or OCP amendment required. Consequently, there would be no public hearing required.
Traffic is one of the biggest issues regarding the development, both according to city staff and to Appleyard residents. Paiement said both properties have access on 28th Avenue NE, and would require access on Lakeshore Road at some time. According to planning documents, staff recommend that the applications be considered for first reading only, with second reading withheld “subject to receipt of updated preliminary traffic information looking at the worst-case scenario for potential traffic generation and potential impacts on the Appleyard Subdivision...”
Regarding traffic, Arsenault said he’d like to provide good access from Lakeshore.
He said he wouldn’t be able to afford to do that if he can only put in 30 or so larger single family lots, and access would remain via 28th Avenue.
The development would be for people 55 years and older, he noted, which would cut down on traffic because most people wouldn’t be heading off to work every day. He compared it to his seniors’ development at 10th Avenue and 10th Street SE.
He added that while the units at the back of the development would be called condominiums, they would really be low-rise detached housing.
Another issue brought up was flooding.
The development would be subject to a geotechnical report and would also require a Hazardous Areas Development Permit because of the steep and potentially unstable slopes. Also, because of its proximity to Shuswap Lake, the site is within an Environmentally Sensitive Riparian Areas Development Permit Area, and would require a Riparian Areas Report from a qualified environmental professional.
Regarding flooding, Arsenault said work on the project would help prevent future slides.
“There have been no major slides since 1998,” which he said coincided with the city’s changing of the water line. He said the geotechnical work would be extensive, as he would be required to drill 12 holes to see what exists from ground level to bedrock. An excavator would also be used to determine if there are any underground water courses.
Arsenault noted that the ensuing drainage and storm water system would be an improvement over what now exists and would prevent water from coming down 28th Avenue.
City councillors had many questions regarding Arsenault’s proposal.
Coun. Alan Harrison described the site as “a fantastic piece of property; one of the nicest in Salmon Arm, I think.”
Harrison also referred to Arsenault’s statement that 25 per cent of the land would be kept natural or landscaped, noting that the natural parts are ones that couldn’t be built on anyway.
Arsenault said he plans to put in a park on the south corner that could be used by the whole neighbourhood, and noted he wants to see a trail established that would connect from the bottom of 28th to 17th where a pedestrian overpass will be going in.
Harrison said he would like to see a geotechnical report before supporting a change to the OCP.
“1998 is not very long ago regarding sliding and slippage.”
Arsenault said such a geotechnical report is very expensive and will make a mess of the property.
“We can’t do that until we’ve finished buying the property and transferred title,” he said, adding he is not going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars unless he knows the zoning is forthcoming.
Coun. Ken Jamieson also asked a number of questions about impact on neighbouring properties with regard to traffic and slides. Coun. Marg Kentel noted that this development would be different than the one at 10th and 10th, because many older people there were attracted by the flat walking distance to shopping.
In the end, Couns. Harrison and Denise Reimer voted against the application, referring to the recent OCP review.
“I think the OCP review was an extensive process by the public; I think R-1 is a zoning the public wanted to stick with,” Reimer said.
Harrison also noted that council has heard from SCIP, Shuswap Construction Industry Professionals, that the city has a shortage of R-1 properties, while R-4 lots exist that have not been developed.
Both Couns. Jamieson and Debbie Cannon said they have not made up their minds on the proposal but would like it to proceed to the next stage in order to hear from the public. Coun. Chad Eliason was absent.
Carl Bannister, the city’s chief administrative officer, told the meeting the application would proceed to the May 14 meeting of council regardless of the planning committee’s vote.
Applicants have a right to have their applications heard by council, which is the statutory authority.